Are the users of Valved N95 masks 'innocent spreaders' of COVID-19?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bawa A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7812940 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul-Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Are the users of Valved N95 masks 'innocent spreaders' of COVID-19?
Bawa Ashvind A Wander Gurpreet S GS Mahajan Ramit R
Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology 20200701 3
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundWith the current COVID-19 pandemic, many healthcare facilities have been lacking a steady supply of filtering facepiece respirators. To better address this challenge, the decontamination and reuse of these respirators is a strategy that has been studied by an increasing number of institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review in PubMed, PubMed Central, Embase, and Google Scholar. Studies were eligible when (electronically or in print) up to 17 June 2020, and published in English, French, German, or Spanish. The primary outcome was reduction of test viruses or test bacteria by log3 for disinfection and log6 for sterilization. Secondary outcome was physical integrity (fit/filtration/degradation) of the respirators after reprocessing. Materials from the grey literature, including an unpublished study were added to the findings.FindingsOf 938 retrieved studies, 35 studies were included in the analysis with 70 individual tests conducted. 17 methods of decontamination were found, included the use of liquids (detergent, benzalkonium chloride, hypochlorite, or ethanol), gases (hydrogen peroxide, ozone, peracetic acid or ethylene oxide), heat (either moist with or without pressure or dry heat), or ultra violet radiation (UVA and UVGI); either alone or in combination. Ethylene oxide, gaseous hydrogen peroxide (with or without peracetic acid), peracetic acid dry fogging system, microwave-generated moist heat, and steam seem to be the most promising methods on decontamination efficacy, physical integrity and filtration capacity.InterpretationA number of methods can be used for N95/FFP2 mask reprocessing in case of shortage, helping to keep healthcare workers and patients safe. However, the selection of disinfection or sterilization methods must take into account local availability and turnover capacity as well as the manufacturer; meaning that some methods work better on specific models from specific manufacturers.Systematic registration numberCRD42020193309.
| S-EPMC8503730 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIt is uncertain if medical masks offer similar protection against COVID-19 compared with N95 respirators.ObjectiveTo determine whether medical masks are noninferior to N95 respirators to prevent COVID-19 in health care workers providing routine care.DesignMulticenter, randomized, noninferiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04296643).Setting29 health care facilities in Canada, Israel, Pakistan, and Egypt from 4 May 2020 to 29 March 2022.Participants1009 health care workers who provided direct care to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19.InterventionUse of medical masks versus fit-tested N95 respirators for 10 weeks, plus universal masking, which was the policy implemented at each site.MeasurementsThe primary outcome was confirmed COVID-19 on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test.ResultsIn the intention-to-treat analysis, RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 52 of 497 (10.46%) participants in the medical mask group versus 47 of 507 (9.27%) in the N95 respirator group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.69]). An unplanned subgroup analysis by country found that in the medical mask group versus the N95 respirator group RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 8 of 131 (6.11%) versus 3 of 135 (2.22%) in Canada (HR, 2.83 [CI, 0.75 to 10.72]), 6 of 17 (35.29%) versus 4 of 17 (23.53%) in Israel (HR, 1.54 [CI, 0.43 to 5.49]), 3 of 92 (3.26%) versus 2 of 94 (2.13%) in Pakistan (HR, 1.50 [CI, 0.25 to 8.98]), and 35 of 257 (13.62%) versus 38 of 261 (14.56%) in Egypt (HR, 0.95 [CI, 0.60 to 1.50]). There were 47 (10.8%) adverse events related to the intervention reported in the medical mask group and 59 (13.6%) in the N95 respirator group.LimitationPotential acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 through household and community exposure, heterogeneity between countries, uncertainty in the estimates of effect, differences in self-reported adherence, differences in baseline antibodies, and between-country differences in circulating variants and vaccination.ConclusionAmong health care workers who provided routine care to patients with COVID-19, the overall estimates rule out a doubling in hazard of RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for medical masks when compared with HRs of RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for N95 respirators. The subgroup results varied by country, and the overall estimates may not be applicable to individual countries because of treatment effect heterogeneity.Primary funding sourceCanadian Institutes of Health Research, World Health Organization, and Juravinski Research Institute.
| S-EPMC9707441 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesSurgical masks and N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) prevent the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and protect medical personnel. Increased demands for surgical masks and N95 FFRs during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in the shortage crisis. However, there is no standard protocol for safe reuse of the N95 FFRs. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of existing decontamination methods of surgical masks and N95 FFRs and provide evidence-based recommendations for selecting an appropriate decontamination method.MethodsWe performed systematic searches of Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE electronic databases. The last search was performed April 11, 2020. Any trials studying surgical masks and/or N95 FFRs decontamination were included. Outcomes were disinfections of virus and bacteria, restoration of the filtration efficiency, and maintenance of the physical structure of the mask.ResultsOverall, 15 studies and 14 decontamination methods were identified. A low level of evidence supported 4 decontamination methods: ultraviolet (UV) germicidal irradiation (9 studies), moist heat (5 studies), microwave-generated steam (4 studies), and hydrogen peroxide vapor (4 studies). Therefore, we recommended these 4 methods, and we recommended against use were given for the other 10 methods.ConclusionsA low level of evidence supported the use of UV germicidal irradiation, moist heat, microwave-generated steam, and hydrogen peroxide vapor for decontamination and reuse of N95 FFRs. These decontamination methods were effective for viral and bacterial disinfection as well as restoration of the filtration efficiency, and the physical structure of the FFRs.
| S-EPMC7438629 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Unusually for a viral infection, the immunological phenotype of severe COVID-19 is characterised by a depleted lymphocyte and elevated neutrophil count, with the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio correlating with disease severity. Neutrophils are the most abundant immune cell in the bloodstream and comprise different subpopulations with pleiotropic actions that are vital for host immunity. Unique neutrophil subpopulations vary in their capacity to mount antimicrobial responses, including NETosis (the generation of neutrophil extracellular traps), degranulation and de novo production of cytokines and chemokines. These processes play a role in antiviral immunity, but may also contribute to the local and systemic tissue damage seen in acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Neutrophils also contribute to complications of COVID-19 such as thrombosis, acute respiratory distress syndrome and multisystem inflammatory disease in children. In this Progress review, we discuss the anti-viral and pathological roles of neutrophils in SARS-CoV-2 infection, and potential therapeutic strategies for COVID-19 that target neutrophil-mediated inflammatory responses.
| S-EPMC9199383 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to determine whether wearing N95 masks for 4 h significantly affected physiological indicators in obese operating room staff compared to surgical masks (SMs). In this randomized crossover trial, the physiological impacts of wearing SMs and N95 masks for 4 h was analysed among 20 obese operating room staff. The data were connected to a nasal sampling tube using the Capnostream 20p monitor. The primary outcome was the change in venous carbon dioxide partial pressure (PvCO2) levels at 4-hour intervention. Secondary outcomes included venous oxygen pressure (PvO2), bicarbonate (HCO3-), pH levels, end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure (PetCO2), peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), respiratory rate (RR), pulse rate (PR) and blood pressure after mask intervention. Dyspnoea, palpitations, headache were assessed with the visual analogue scale (VAS) score. N95 masks had a statistically significant rather than clinically significant impact on PvCO2 (mean [95% CI], 1.4 [0.8, 1.9], P < 0.001) and RR (0.6 [0.1, 1.1)], P = 0.023) changes compared with SM. The three subjective VAS scores of the N95 group showed significantly increased than SM group after 2 h. In conclusion, obese operating room staff continuously wearing SM or N95 masks 4 h showed almost no difference in physiological impacts. Trial registration NCT05950256, 18/07/2023.
| S-EPMC11850626 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sustainable solutions on fabricating and using a face mask to block the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spread during this coronavirus pandemic of 2019 (COVID-19) are required as society is directed by the World Health Organization (WHO) toward wearing it, resulting in an increasingly huge demand with over 4 000 000 000 masks used per day globally. Herein, various new mask technologies and advanced materials are reviewed to deal with critical shortages, cross-infection, and secondary transmission risk of masks. A number of countries have used cloth masks and 3D-printed masks as substitutes, whose filtration efficiencies can be improved by using nanofibers or mixing other polymers into them. Since 2020, researchers continue to improve the performance of masks by adding various functionalities, for example using metal nanoparticles and herbal extracts to inactivate pathogens, using graphene to make masks photothermal and superhydrophobic, and using triboelectric nanogenerator (TENG) to prolong mask lifetime. The recent advances in material technology have led to the development of antimicrobial coatings, which are introduced in this review. When incorporated into masks, these advanced materials and technologies can aid in the prevention of secondary transmission of the virus.
| S-EPMC8787406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRespiratory protective devices are critical in protecting against infection in healthcare workers at high risk of novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19); however, recommendations are conflicting and epidemiological data on their relative effectiveness against COVID-19 are limited.PurposeTo compare medical masks to N95 respirators in preventing laboratory-confirmed viral infection and respiratory illness including coronavirus specifically in healthcare workers.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL from January 1, 2014, to March 9, 2020. Update of published search conducted from January 1, 1990, to December 9, 2014.Study selectionRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the protective effect of medical masks to N95 respirators in healthcare workers.Data extractionReviewer pair independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence.Data synthesisFour RCTs were meta-analyzed adjusting for clustering. Compared with N95 respirators; the use of medical masks did not increase laboratory-confirmed viral (including coronaviruses) respiratory infection (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.90-1.25; I2 = 0%; low certainty in the evidence) or clinical respiratory illness (OR 1.49; 95% CI: 0.98-2.28; I2 = 78%; very low certainty in the evidence). Only one trial evaluated coronaviruses separately and found no difference between the two groups (P = .49).LimitationsIndirectness and imprecision of available evidence.ConclusionsLow certainty evidence suggests that medical masks and N95 respirators offer similar protection against viral respiratory infection including coronavirus in healthcare workers during non-aerosol-generating care. Preservation of N95 respirators for high-risk, aerosol-generating procedures in this pandemic should be considered when in short supply.
| S-EPMC7298295 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Face coverings are a key component of preventive health measure strategies to mitigate the spread of respiratory illnesses. In this study five groups of masks were investigated that are of particular relevance to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: re-usable, fabric two-layer and multi-layer masks, disposable procedure/surgical masks, KN95 and N95 filtering facepiece respirators. Experimental work focussed on the particle penetration through mask materials as a function of particle diameter, and the total inward leakage protection performance of the mask system. Geometric mean fabric protection factors varied from 1.78 to 144.5 for the fabric two-layer and KN95 materials, corresponding to overall filtration efficiencies of 43.8% and 99.3% using a flow rate of 17 L/min, equivalent to a breathing expiration rate for a person in a sedentary or standing position conversing with another individual. Geometric mean total inward leakage protection factors for the 2-layer, multi-layer and procedure masks were <2.3, while 6.2 was achieved for the KN95 masks. The highest values were measured for the N95 group at 165.7. Mask performance is dominated by face seal leakage. Despite the additional filtering layers added to cloth masks, and the higher filtration efficiency of the materials used in disposable procedure and KN95 masks, the total inward leakage protection factor was only marginally improved. N95 FFRs were the only mask group investigated that provided not only high filtration efficiency but high total inward leakage protection, and remain the best option to protect individuals from exposure to aerosol in high risk settings. The Mask Quality Factor and total inward leakage performance are very useful to determine the best options for masking. However, it is highly recommended that testing is undertaken on prospective products, or guidance is sought from impartial authorities, to confirm they meet any implied standards.
| S-EPMC8494377 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective/hypothesisInvestigate potential problems in the daily life communication of cochlear implant (CI) patients due to the widespread use of face masks in public places during the COVID-19 pandemic.Study designProspective survey study.MethodsThis study used an online questionnaire about the effects of face masks on daily life communication of adult CI users. The questionnaire consists of three parts: (a) A face mask questionnaire, (b) loneliness question (c) three subdomains of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire to assess quality of life. The questionnaires were send out on October 20, 2020. Four hundred and seven adult CI users were invited to participate in the study. The survey inclusion was closed on November 5, 2020. The study setting was the Rotterdam Cochlear Implant Center, Erasmus MC, a tertiary referral center in The Netherlands. The loneliness question and Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire were analyzed for possible differences between the current situation with masks and the situation before, when masks were not commonly used.ResultsTwo hundred and twenty one adult CI users (54% female, mean age 62 years) participated in the study. The face mask questionnaire showed that face masks cause considerable problems in daily life communication of 80% of the participants. Also, CI users tend to feel more lonely and all used subdomains of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire worsened due to the use of face masks.ConclusionThe widespread use of face masks greatly complicates the daily life communication of CI users and reduces quality of life.Level of evidence3.
| S-EPMC8223455 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and Objectives: The COVID-19 outbreak has necessitated the prolonged use of N95 facemasks in addition to traditional surgical facemasks by healthcare workers. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of wearing N95 facemasks in addition to surgical facemasks on peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) and heart rate (HR) among dental professionals during routine care. Materials and Methods: This prospective study compared SpO2 and HR between dental providers wearing N95 + surgical facemasks vs. wearing a surgical facemask only. SpO2 and HR were recorded using a portable pulse oximeter before wearing the facemask (T0); at 30 min (T1); at 1 h (T2); and at the end of clinical activity (T3). Inter-group and intra-group differences were assessed with independent t tests and repeated measures ANOVA, respectively. Results: A total of 88 participants (57 wearing N95 + surgical facemasks, and 31 wearing a surgical facemask only) completed the study. The two groups did not statistically differ in SpO2 at different timepoints nor showed any intra-group differences. The participants wearing N95 + surgical facemasks exhibited a statistically higher HR at T0 (p = 0.007), T2 (p = 0.010), and T3 (p = 0.014) compared to those wearing a surgical facemask only. A statistically significant decrease was observed in HR between T0 and T3 in those wearing N95 + surgical facemasks (p = 0.012). No intra-group differences were seen in HR over time in those wearing a surgical facemask only. Conclusions: The continuous use of an N95 in addition to a surgical facemask did not show any significant effects in SpO2 during routine care; however, the concurrent use of an N95 and a surgical facemask seemed to be accompanied by a decrease in HR, although the values remained within the normal range.
| S-EPMC10890314 | biostudies-literature